Giorgia Meloni’s government faces escalating tensions with the judiciary following a court ruling against the detention of migrants, undermining its migration policy. In response, legislation was swiftly enacted, prompting judicial inquiries into the precedence of EU laws. Amidst this, the Italian Navy prepares to transport migrants to Albania, further complicating the situation. The longstanding friction between Italy’s political landscape and judicial independence, rooted in historical context, is intensifying calls for reform as the judiciary’s efficiency is scrutinized amid rising populism.
Political Tensions and Judicial Independence
In a striking display of political fervor, Giorgia Meloni and several of her ministers have unleashed a barrage of criticism against judges and prosecutors who resist the government’s directives. The latest flashpoint arose from a ruling by a Roman court that deemed the detention of boat migrants at an Italian reception center in Albania unlawful. This decision effectively undermined a key component of Italy’s new migration strategy.
In response, the government swiftly enacted a law just four days later aimed at reinforcing the legal framework for the controversial extraterritorial reception center. However, the judiciary was quick to react, with a Bologna court seeking clarification from the European Court of Justice on whether European legislation takes precedence over national laws in matters of migration policy. This judicial inquiry has only intensified the ongoing conflict, despite calls for restraint from President Sergio Mattarella.
As tensions mount, the Italian Navy’s “Libra” warship has embarked from Messina to the southern Mediterranean, poised to transport new boat migrants to Albania. This move is expected to generate further legal challenges and heated debates.
Within the government’s inner circle, there is a palpable sense of conspiracy, fueled by ongoing investigations into various members of the ruling parties. Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, currently entangled in legal issues himself, has been particularly vocal, suggesting that judges with political biases should abandon their robes for a career in politics.
The Longstanding Struggle Between Politics and Justice
The contentious relationship between politicians and the judiciary—encompassing judges and prosecutors—has been a persistent theme in Italian history. While the current discord is partly fueled by the rise of right-wing populism, it is not solely the result of this political shift. The Italian judiciary enjoys significant autonomy, a legacy of the country’s experiences under fascism, which is unparalleled across Europe. Judicial independence is enshrined as a fundamental principle in Italy’s constitution.
The judiciary’s operations are overseen by the Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura (CSM), the supreme judicial council, which comprises two-thirds elected members from within the judiciary and one-third from Parliament. The CSM plays a crucial role in determining the careers and disciplinary matters of judges and prosecutors, often sparking valid criticism.
Historically, the system functioned smoothly until the 1990s when the judiciary gained widespread popularity, particularly during the uncovering of the Tangentopoli scandal by prosecutor Antonio Di Pietro. This major bribery scandal led to the collapse of Italy’s post-war party system and galvanized public support for prosecutors and investigators as champions against corruption.
However, this political vacuum paved the way for Silvio Berlusconi, who capitalized on the disarray of the former political structure, establishing his party, Forza Italia, and securing his position as a leading figure in the center-right landscape.
Since the mid-1990s, the judiciary has become a contentious battleground in Italian politics, with factions known as Giustizialisti, advocating for strict justice, and Garantisti, who defend individual rights against public power abuses. This divide has only deepened public disillusionment with the judiciary, particularly as high-profile cases often conclude without significant impact.
With Italy’s judiciary facing scrutiny for its slow processes—among the slowest in the EU—calls for reform are growing louder. The European Union has set a deadline for Italy to expedite civil and criminal proceedings by 2026, or risk losing access to recovery funds. This backdrop has made criticism of the judiciary not only a political strategy but a pressing necessity for genuine reform.